B. 91-95 題 The year 2010 saw a significant shift in the understanding
of the famed “Mozart Effect” with the publication of a
meticulous meta-analysis by Jakob Pietschnig, Martin Voracek,
and Anton K. Formann. Their research, aptly titled “Mozart
effect–Shmozart effect: A meta-analysis,” aimed to dissect the
existing body of evidence surrounding the purported cognitive
enhancements associated with listening to Mozart’s music. This
analysis served as a crucial turning point, offering a more
nuanced and objective perspective on the phenomenon.
The researchers embarked on a rigorous quest for relevant
studies, meticulously combing through academic databases to
identify 36 studies that met their stringent inclusion criteria.
These studies, encompassing a total of 3,000 participants,
specifically investigated the effects of listening to Mozart’s
music on spatial-temporal reasoning tasks. To gauge the
magnitude of these effects, the researchers employed effect size
calculations, a statistical measure that quantifies the difference
between groups (e.g., Mozart listeners versus control groups) on
spatial reasoning performance. Additionally, they conducted
moderator analyses to explore potential factors influencing the
effect size, such as the type of music used, the duration of
listening, and the specific cognitive tasks employed.
Contrary to the initial hype surrounding the Mozart Effect,
the meta-analysis revealed a rather modest overall effect size.
This indicated that listening to Mozart’s music had a minimal
impact on spatial-temporal reasoning compared to control
conditions. Furthermore, the analysis suggested that the
observed effects were more likely attributable to factors such as
mood enhancement and increased arousal rather than a direct
improvement in spatial ability. Listening to enjoyable music,
regardless of the composer, can elevate mood and alertness,
which may indirectly enhance cognitive performance by
improving focus and motivation. Interestingly, the researchers
found no evidence to support the claim that the Mozart Effect
was exclusive to Mozart’s music. Other genres, including
Baroque and even pop music, could also produce similar
cognitive enhancements, suggesting that the effect is not unique
to Mozart’s compositions.
The meta-analysis by Pietschnig et al. (2010) played a
critical role in reshaping the scientific understanding of the
Mozart Effect. By providing a more balanced and critical
perspective, the findings challenged the initial claims of a direct
and substantial improvement in spatial intelligence. Instead,
they highlighted the role of mood and arousal as potential
mediators of the observed effects, suggesting that the benefits of
music listening extend beyond specific cognitive domains.
【題組】92. Which of the following statements defines the Mozart
Effect?
(A) It refers to the effects of analyzing Mozart’s music on
constructing architecture.
(B) It refers to the effects of meditating to Mozart’s music
on solving math problems.
(C)It refers to the effects of listening to Mozart’s music on
spatial-temporal reasoning tasks.
(D) It refers to the effects of exploring Mozart’s music on
describing a piece of music composed by Mozart.